Plyometrics
Introduction
Chu (1998) described plyometrics training as a variety of exercises or drills that uses speed and strength to produce an explosive movement and an increase in power. The following report will look in detail what plyometrics is and explore previous literature comparing the strengths and weaknesses of land based plyometric training and aquatic based plyometric training. What is Plyometrics? Yessis (1991) states plyometrics has been encouraged to be used by athletes as it is specific to many sports due to the combination of force and velocity development, plyometrics is also known for its ability to increase reactive strength and jumping skill and coordination. Plyometrics can improve reactive strength by using the Strength Shortening Cycle (SSC) in order to create maximal power output. Plyometrics is focused on the principle that the strength shortening cycle can create greater power than a normal muscle contraction because the muscles are able to store the tension from the stretch for a short period of time, this causes the muscle to react like a rubber band, the greatest force can be accomplished when the stretch is performed as fast as possible. Lundin & Berg (1991) described the process of plyometrics |
as a muscle forcibly stretched before a contraction uses the stretch reflex to activate the muscle to shorten vigorously; the elastic nature of the muscle fibres allows the muscle to store energy during negative work, which will be released during the shortening contraction.
Schmidtbleicher (1992) states typical plyometric exercises are the counter movement jump (CMJ) and the drop jump (DJ). The drop jump involves different movement patterns than the counter movement jump due to the shorter contact time. Komi (2000) states there is a larger contribution of the stretch shortening cycle mechanism in the drop jump. Makaruk & Sacewicz (2011) propose plyometrics are linked with high ground reaction forces during landing, ground reaction forces during the drop jump and counter movement jump can exceed 3 and 5-7 times the body mass of individuals.
It is important when designing training programs to make them as specific as possible to the sporting environment or physical activity an athlete participates in. The training program must be relevant to the demands of the event for which the athlete is being trained. Radcliffe & Farentinos (1985) state an effective plyometrics program accomplishes its outcomes through the use of four important variables: volume, intensity, frequency, and recovery. Volume relates to the total work performed for each session, intensity relates to difficulty and number of exercises performed, frequency refers to the amount of repetitions that an exercise is performed and the number of sessions per week.
Land based and aquatic based plyometrics
Land based plyometrics training is regarded as a useful training tool for athletes who participate in sport, these sports involve dynamic explosive types of movement such as basketball. A study by Boraczynski & Urniaz (2008) shown that 8 weeks of land based plyometric training has proven to be effective in producing positive changes in maximum jump velocity, maximum force, absolute and relative power, as well as average power during 10 maximum counter movement jumps among university level basketball players. Several researchers (Marginson et al. 2005; and Jamurtas et al. 2000) have questioned the efficacy of the potential risks of land based plyometric training as a conditioning technique. Jamurtas et al (2000) found damage to muscle fibres could be the sources of higher muscle soreness and lead to decreases in muscle function after the performance of land based plyometric exercises.
With the possibility of injury risk, muscle soreness, and decreases in muscle function due to land based plyometric training programs, research findings (Donoghue et al. 2011) have found that aquatic plyometric training programs can provide a safer and more effective alternative for athletes, who need to develop their muscle power optimally. There are a range of explanations as to why aquatic plyometric training can be preferred to land based plyometric training. Miller et al. (2007) states the buoyancy provided by the water due to the density of water compared to air, reduces the impact forces and weight-bearing stress on the joints and limbs. Miller et al. (2007) also proposes the profile, wave drag, and the high viscosity of water increases the resistance to movement. Robinson et al. (2004) states more muscle activation is needed to overcome the water resistance and perform the same movement in water. Triplett et al. (2009) proposes aquatic based training is becoming a popular activity among athletes as it has been proven to provide improvements with the rehabilitation of injuries, improvements in physical performance, and in bone mineral density. Martel et al. (2005) states due to the decreasing likelihood of injuries in aquatic training compared with jumping activities on land, aquatic training has a greater potential, as there are lower forces and less joint compression during landing.
A study by Arazi, Coetzee, & Asadi (2012) carried out a study looking at the comparison between the effects of an 8 week land based and aquatic based plyometric training program on the jumping ability and agility of male basketball players. The results of the study shown an 8 week aquatic based program provides the same or slightly more benefits with regard to the jumping ability and agility of basketball players compared to a land based program. Due to literature stating that aquatic based plyometric training programs are associated with less muscle soreness and lower risks of injury when compared to land based plyometric training programs, make it a viable alternative for athletes who participate in sports that involve explosive movements.
Conclusion
This article has looked at what plyometrics is and has looked at previous literature on land based plyometric training and aquatic based plyometric training. The key findings from the article show plyometrics is focused on the principle that the strength shortening cycle can create greater power than a normal muscle contraction because the muscles are able to store the tension from the stretch for a short period of time, and aquatic based plyometric training can be seen as a good alternative to land based training, due to the benefits of less muscle soreness and smaller injury risks, even though both types of training show similar benefits.
References
Arazi, H., Coetzee, B. and Asadi, A. (2012) Comparative effect of land and aquatic based plyometric training on jumping ability and agility of young basketball players. South African Journal for Research in Sport, Physical Education and Recreation. Vol. 34, No. 2: 1-14.
Boraczynski, T. and Urniaz, J. (2008) The effect of plyometric training on strength-speed abilities of basketball players. Research yearbook. Vol. 14, No. 1: 14-19.
Chu, D. (1998) Jumping into plyometrics . (1st ed.) Champaign: Human Kinetics.
Donoghue, O.A., Shimojo, H. and Takagi, H. (2011) Impact forces of plyometric exercises performed on land and in water. Sport Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Vol. 3, No. 3: 303-309.
Jamurtas, A.Z., Fatouros, I.G., Buckenmeyer, P., Kokkinidis, E., Taxildaris, K., Kambas, A. and Kyriazis, G. (2000) Effects of plyometric exercise on muscle soreness and plasma creatine kinase levels and its comparison with eccentric and concentric exercise. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. Vol. 14, No. 1: 68-74.
Komi, P.V. (2000) Stretch-shortening cycle: a powerful model to study normal and fatigued muscle. Journal of Biomechanics. Vol. 33: 1197- 1206.
Lundin, P. and Berg, W. (1991) A review of plyometric training . Strength and Conditioning Journal. Vol. 13: 22-30.
Makaruk, H. and Sacewicz, T. (2011) The effect of drop height and body mass on drop jump intensity. Biology of Sport. Vol. 28: 63-67.
Marginson, V., Rowlands, A.V., Gleeson, N.P. and Eston, R.G. (2005) Comparison of the symptoms of exercise-induced muscle damage after an initial and repeated bout of plyometric exercise in men & boys. Journal of Applied Physiology. Vol. 99, No. 3: 1174-1180.
Martel, G.F., Harmer, M.L., Logan, J.M. and Parker, C.B. (2005) Aquatic plyometric training increases vertical jump in female volleyball players. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. Vol. 37, No. 10: 1814-1819.
Miller, M.G., Cheatham, C.C., Porter, A.R., Ricard, M.D., Hennigar, D. and Berry, D.C. (2007) Chest and waist deep aquatic plyometric training and average force, power, and vertical jump performance. International Journal of aquatic Research and Education. Vol. 1, No. 2: 145-155.
Radcliffe, J. and Farentinos, R. (1985) Plyometrics - explosive prower training. Champaign: Human Kinetics.
Robinson, L.E., Decor, S.T., Merrick, M.A. and Buckworth, J. (2004) The effects of land vs. aquatic plyometrics on power, torque, velocity and muscle soreness in women. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. Vol. 18, No. 1: 84-91.
Schmidtbleicher, D. (1992) Training for power events. (1st ed.) Oxford: Blackwell.
Triplett, N.T., Colado, J.C., Benavent, J., Alakhdar, Y., Madera, J. and Gonzalez, L. (2009) Concentric and Impact Forces of Single-Leg Jumps in an Aquatic Environment versus on Land. Medicine & Science in Sport & Exercise. Vol. 41, No. 9: 1790-1796.
Yessis, M. (1991) Speed/explosiveness with plyometrics. Scholastic Coach. Vol. 60: 32-34.
Schmidtbleicher (1992) states typical plyometric exercises are the counter movement jump (CMJ) and the drop jump (DJ). The drop jump involves different movement patterns than the counter movement jump due to the shorter contact time. Komi (2000) states there is a larger contribution of the stretch shortening cycle mechanism in the drop jump. Makaruk & Sacewicz (2011) propose plyometrics are linked with high ground reaction forces during landing, ground reaction forces during the drop jump and counter movement jump can exceed 3 and 5-7 times the body mass of individuals.
It is important when designing training programs to make them as specific as possible to the sporting environment or physical activity an athlete participates in. The training program must be relevant to the demands of the event for which the athlete is being trained. Radcliffe & Farentinos (1985) state an effective plyometrics program accomplishes its outcomes through the use of four important variables: volume, intensity, frequency, and recovery. Volume relates to the total work performed for each session, intensity relates to difficulty and number of exercises performed, frequency refers to the amount of repetitions that an exercise is performed and the number of sessions per week.
Land based and aquatic based plyometrics
Land based plyometrics training is regarded as a useful training tool for athletes who participate in sport, these sports involve dynamic explosive types of movement such as basketball. A study by Boraczynski & Urniaz (2008) shown that 8 weeks of land based plyometric training has proven to be effective in producing positive changes in maximum jump velocity, maximum force, absolute and relative power, as well as average power during 10 maximum counter movement jumps among university level basketball players. Several researchers (Marginson et al. 2005; and Jamurtas et al. 2000) have questioned the efficacy of the potential risks of land based plyometric training as a conditioning technique. Jamurtas et al (2000) found damage to muscle fibres could be the sources of higher muscle soreness and lead to decreases in muscle function after the performance of land based plyometric exercises.
With the possibility of injury risk, muscle soreness, and decreases in muscle function due to land based plyometric training programs, research findings (Donoghue et al. 2011) have found that aquatic plyometric training programs can provide a safer and more effective alternative for athletes, who need to develop their muscle power optimally. There are a range of explanations as to why aquatic plyometric training can be preferred to land based plyometric training. Miller et al. (2007) states the buoyancy provided by the water due to the density of water compared to air, reduces the impact forces and weight-bearing stress on the joints and limbs. Miller et al. (2007) also proposes the profile, wave drag, and the high viscosity of water increases the resistance to movement. Robinson et al. (2004) states more muscle activation is needed to overcome the water resistance and perform the same movement in water. Triplett et al. (2009) proposes aquatic based training is becoming a popular activity among athletes as it has been proven to provide improvements with the rehabilitation of injuries, improvements in physical performance, and in bone mineral density. Martel et al. (2005) states due to the decreasing likelihood of injuries in aquatic training compared with jumping activities on land, aquatic training has a greater potential, as there are lower forces and less joint compression during landing.
A study by Arazi, Coetzee, & Asadi (2012) carried out a study looking at the comparison between the effects of an 8 week land based and aquatic based plyometric training program on the jumping ability and agility of male basketball players. The results of the study shown an 8 week aquatic based program provides the same or slightly more benefits with regard to the jumping ability and agility of basketball players compared to a land based program. Due to literature stating that aquatic based plyometric training programs are associated with less muscle soreness and lower risks of injury when compared to land based plyometric training programs, make it a viable alternative for athletes who participate in sports that involve explosive movements.
Conclusion
This article has looked at what plyometrics is and has looked at previous literature on land based plyometric training and aquatic based plyometric training. The key findings from the article show plyometrics is focused on the principle that the strength shortening cycle can create greater power than a normal muscle contraction because the muscles are able to store the tension from the stretch for a short period of time, and aquatic based plyometric training can be seen as a good alternative to land based training, due to the benefits of less muscle soreness and smaller injury risks, even though both types of training show similar benefits.
References
Arazi, H., Coetzee, B. and Asadi, A. (2012) Comparative effect of land and aquatic based plyometric training on jumping ability and agility of young basketball players. South African Journal for Research in Sport, Physical Education and Recreation. Vol. 34, No. 2: 1-14.
Boraczynski, T. and Urniaz, J. (2008) The effect of plyometric training on strength-speed abilities of basketball players. Research yearbook. Vol. 14, No. 1: 14-19.
Chu, D. (1998) Jumping into plyometrics . (1st ed.) Champaign: Human Kinetics.
Donoghue, O.A., Shimojo, H. and Takagi, H. (2011) Impact forces of plyometric exercises performed on land and in water. Sport Health: A Multidisciplinary Approach. Vol. 3, No. 3: 303-309.
Jamurtas, A.Z., Fatouros, I.G., Buckenmeyer, P., Kokkinidis, E., Taxildaris, K., Kambas, A. and Kyriazis, G. (2000) Effects of plyometric exercise on muscle soreness and plasma creatine kinase levels and its comparison with eccentric and concentric exercise. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. Vol. 14, No. 1: 68-74.
Komi, P.V. (2000) Stretch-shortening cycle: a powerful model to study normal and fatigued muscle. Journal of Biomechanics. Vol. 33: 1197- 1206.
Lundin, P. and Berg, W. (1991) A review of plyometric training . Strength and Conditioning Journal. Vol. 13: 22-30.
Makaruk, H. and Sacewicz, T. (2011) The effect of drop height and body mass on drop jump intensity. Biology of Sport. Vol. 28: 63-67.
Marginson, V., Rowlands, A.V., Gleeson, N.P. and Eston, R.G. (2005) Comparison of the symptoms of exercise-induced muscle damage after an initial and repeated bout of plyometric exercise in men & boys. Journal of Applied Physiology. Vol. 99, No. 3: 1174-1180.
Martel, G.F., Harmer, M.L., Logan, J.M. and Parker, C.B. (2005) Aquatic plyometric training increases vertical jump in female volleyball players. Medicine and Science in Sports and Exercise. Vol. 37, No. 10: 1814-1819.
Miller, M.G., Cheatham, C.C., Porter, A.R., Ricard, M.D., Hennigar, D. and Berry, D.C. (2007) Chest and waist deep aquatic plyometric training and average force, power, and vertical jump performance. International Journal of aquatic Research and Education. Vol. 1, No. 2: 145-155.
Radcliffe, J. and Farentinos, R. (1985) Plyometrics - explosive prower training. Champaign: Human Kinetics.
Robinson, L.E., Decor, S.T., Merrick, M.A. and Buckworth, J. (2004) The effects of land vs. aquatic plyometrics on power, torque, velocity and muscle soreness in women. Journal of Strength and Conditioning Research. Vol. 18, No. 1: 84-91.
Schmidtbleicher, D. (1992) Training for power events. (1st ed.) Oxford: Blackwell.
Triplett, N.T., Colado, J.C., Benavent, J., Alakhdar, Y., Madera, J. and Gonzalez, L. (2009) Concentric and Impact Forces of Single-Leg Jumps in an Aquatic Environment versus on Land. Medicine & Science in Sport & Exercise. Vol. 41, No. 9: 1790-1796.
Yessis, M. (1991) Speed/explosiveness with plyometrics. Scholastic Coach. Vol. 60: 32-34.